B.H. v. Mueller_88-5599_Joint Motion to Terminate Extended Investigator Caseload Plan_Dkt. 901.pdf

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

B.H., et al., Plaintiffs, v.

HEIDI E. MUELLER, Director, Illinois Department of Children and Family Services, Defendant.

) No. 88 C 5599 ) Hon. Jorge L. Alonso ) Judge Presiding

JOINT MOTION TO TERMINATE THE EXTENDED AND

REVISED IMPLEMENTATION PLAN TO ADDRESS INVESTIGATOR CASELOADS

NOW COME Plaintiffs, by their counsel, and the Defendant, Heidi E. Mueller, Director, Illinois Department of Children and Family Services, by her attorney, Kwame Raoul, Illinois

Attorney General, and pursuant to the terms of the Extended and Revised Implementation Plan to

Address Investigator Caseloads jointly seek termination of the Extended and Revised

Implementation Plan. Extended and Revised Implementation Plan, Part III, Section B, ¶(2)(B), Dkt. 855 at pp. 12-13.

1. The Extended and Revised Implementation Plan provides that “[t]he Department will notify Plaintiffs when it (i) has achieved a vacancy percentage of no greater than 6% in all four Regions simultaneously for a continuous six-month period, or (ii) otherwise believes it has achieved compliance with the case assignment limitations set forth in Paragraph 26(a).” Dkt. 855 at 12-13.

2. On January 6, 2026, Defendant notified Plaintiffs in writing of DCFS’s position that it (i) had achieved a vacancy percentage of no greater than 6% in all four regions simultaneously for a continuous six-month period; and (ii) is in substantial compliance with the caseload limitations set forth in Paragraph 26(a) of the Restated Consent Decree.

Case: 1:88-cv-05599 Document #: 901 Filed: 02/09/26 Page 1 of 8 PageID #:8938

I. Achievement of Vacancy Percentage of No Greater than Six Percent in Each Region

3. The Department has provided Plaintiffs with evidence, including worker-level data regarding investigation assignments, demonstrating that it has achieved a vacancy percentage of no greater than 6% in all four Regions simultaneously for a continuous six-month period.

4. The December 2025 DCP Region Vacancy Percentage Report, attached as Exhibit

A, reflects that DCFS has achieved an actual vacancy rate below 6% statewide and for each of the four regions, as follows:

Central Region (actual vacancy rate below 6% since March 2025)

Month Actual Vacancy Rate

March 2025 5.5 % April 2025 4.1 % May 2025 2.1 % June 2025 2.2 % July 2025 2.2 % August 2025 2.8 % September 2025 2.4 % October 2025 3.6 % November 2025 4.8 % December 2025 1.9 %

Cook Region

(actual vacancy rate below 6% since March 2024)

March 2025 2.3 % April 2025 2.7 % May 2025 1.4 % June 2025 0.0 % July 2025 0.0 % August 2025 0.0 % September 2025 0.0 % October 2025 0.0 % November 2025 0.0 % December 2025 0.0%

Case: 1:88-cv-05599 Document #: 901 Filed: 02/09/26 Page 2 of 8 PageID #:8939

Northern Region (actual vacancy rate below 6% since June 2025)

June 2025 2.7 % July 2025 2.2 % August 2025 1.1 % September 2025 1.7 % October 2025 1.2 % November 2025 1.8 % December 2025 1.8 %

Southern Region

(actual vacancy rate below 6% since December 2022)

March 2025 0.0 % April 2025 0.0 % May 2025 0.0 % June 2025 0.0 % July 2025 0.0 % August 2025 0.0 % September 2025 0.0 % October 2025 0.0 % November 2025 0.0 % December 2025 0.0%

5. Plaintiffs do not dispute that DCFS has achieved a vacancy percentage of no greater than 6% in all four Regions simultaneously for a continuous six-month period.

II. Substantial Compliance with Paragraph 26(a) of the Restated Consent Decree

6. Paragraph 26(a) of the Restated Consent Decree provides:

By July 1, 1993, each DCFS child protective services investigator will be assigned no more than 12 new abuse or neglect investigations per month during nine months of the calendar year. During the other three months of the calendar year, the investigator will be assigned no more than 15 new abuse or neglect investigations per month. Neither the nine months nor the three months need occur consecutively.

Dkt. 456-2, Paragraph 26(a).

Case: 1:88-cv-05599 Document #: 901 Filed: 02/09/26 Page 3 of 8 PageID #:8940

7. The Department asserts that it has achieved substantial compliance with the case assignment limitations set forth in Paragraph 26(a) of the Restated Consent Decree. Dkt. 855 at

12-13. DCFS has provided Plaintiffs with a summary of DCFS’s analysis of new assignments for individual investigators. According to DCFS’s analysis, during 2025, a very small percentage of individual investigators received over 15 new assignments every month:

Month Percentage of Staff Who Received Over 15 New Assignments

January 2025 2.2% February 2025 1.9% March 2025 1.7% April 2025 2.3% May 2025 1.5% June 2025 0.0% July 2025 0.0% August 2025 0.1% September 2025 0.3% October 2025 0.4% November 2025 0.3% December 2025 0.3%

8. Plaintiffs performed their own analysis of the Department’s worker-level data rather than testing or relying upon the Department’s analysis. Plaintiffs have determined that although instances of investigators receiving more than 15 new assignments in a month or exceeding 12 newly assigned investigations for more than 3 months—assignments that Plaintiffs contend constitute violations of the Decree’s limits—continue to occur sporadically, they have decreased since the Department’s implementation of its most recent management strategies.1

1 The Department’s enhanced processes include auditing and monitoring that improve real-time tracking in the Statewide Automated Child Welfare Information System (SACWIS) and will require Area Administrators’ consultation and approval before an investigator receives their 11th or more new assignment within a month.

Case: 1:88-cv-05599 Document #: 901 Filed: 02/09/26 Page 4 of 8 PageID #:8941

Child Protection Investigators January 2025 -- October 2025

With Violations Without Violations

9. According to Plaintiffs’ analysis, of the 852 child protection investigators employed January 2025-October 2025, 48 had at least one month where they were assigned more new investigations than Plaintiffs assert the Decree permits. 2

10. Plaintiffs’ detailed analysis of what Plaintiffs count as violations reveal that the most serious and sustained violations occurred at three sites (Decatur, Bourbonnais, and

Rockford), largely clustered during the first half of the 2025 calendar year. In recent months, the number of what Plaintiffs count as violative assignments at the Decatur and Rockford sites has decreased and Plaintiffs understand the Department is closely monitoring those sites.

11. The Department’s data further shows that at the Bourbonnais site, a concerning pattern of assignments that Plaintiffs contend violate the limits imposed by the Decree has continued. For example, in July 2025—December 2025, there were 9 instances of an investigator receiving more than 15 new assignments, with some receiving as many as 20 new assignments in one or more months. Additionally, in September 2025—December 2025, each month had multiple

2 See Dkt. 855 at 4 (identifying the seven categories of workers counted as “investigators”).

Case: 1:88-cv-05599 Document #: 901 Filed: 02/09/26 Page 5 of 8 PageID #:8942 instances of investigators assigned 12-15 new investigations despite having exceeded 12 new assignments for at least 3 previous months in the calendar year.

12. The Department has identified the steps it is taking to support the Bourbonnais site, including high-level leadership presence on-site while vacancies are filled. As of January 1, 2026, the Department installed a new Area Administrator to support this site. The Department has also secured additional investigative capacity, adding nine individuals as a temporary detail.

13. It is Plaintiff’s position that the Department has not achieved perfect compliance with Paragraph 26(a) of the Decree. However, Plaintiffs recognize the significant and measurable impact that the Department’s modified hiring and management practices have had to date, such that the vast majority of workers and sites have not had a single violation of the Decree’s assignment limits in months. Plaintiffs recognize that Defendants can be deemed to be in substantial compliance with Paragraph 26(a) of the Decree even if there are minor violations, so long as they occur only sporadically and the causes are promptly and effectively resolved.

Plaintiffs do not dispute that the Department has achieved that level of performance.

IV. Continued Reporting on Caseload Assignments

14. The Parties stipulate that in accordance with Paragraph 68 of the Restated Consent

Decree, DCFS will continue to regularly provide Plaintiffs with reports and data sufficient to permit Plaintiffs to evaluate the status of DCFS’s compliance with Paragraph 26(a). That reporting will include ongoing provision of the DCFS Investigations Caseload & Vacancy Report, the 72-

Hour Report, the Caseloads Thresholds Summary Report, the Caseload Thresholds Report, and the DCP Region Vacancy Report.

Case: 1:88-cv-05599 Document #: 901 Filed: 02/09/26 Page 6 of 8 PageID #:8943

WHEREFORE, the parties respectfully request that this Court approve the termination of the Extended and Revised Implementation Plan to Address Investigator Caseloads.

Dated: February 9, 2026 Respectfully submitted, KWAME RAOUL

Illinois Attorney General

By: s/Barbara L. Greenspan Barbara L. Greenspan Assistant Attorney General 115 S. LaSalle Street Chicago, Illinois 60603

(312) 814-7087 Barbara.greenspan@illinois.gov

Counsel for Defendant

By: s/Heidi Dalenberg Heidi Dalenberg Melissa Staas

Illinois ACLU, Inc.

150 N. Michigan Ave., Suite 600

Chicago, IL 60601

Counsel for Plaintiffs

Case: 1:88-cv-05599 Document #: 901 Filed: 02/09/26 Page 7 of 8 PageID #:8944 mailto:Barbara.greenspan@illinois.gov

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned, an attorney, deposes and states that a copy of the Joint Motion to Terminate the Extended and Revised Implementation Plan to Address Investigator Caseloads was served upon counsel of record by electronic filing this 9th day of February 2026.

The Expert Panel listed below, who are not ECF filers, were served by email on February 9, 2026.

s/Barbara L. Greenspan Attorney Marci White, MSW mwhitedcr@gmail.com

Mark Testa mtesta@illinois.edu

Case: 1:88-cv-05599 Document #: 901 Filed: 02/09/26 Page 8 of 8 PageID #:8945 mailto:pv@childwelfaregroup.org mailto:mtesta@illinois.edu